The model begins with the final results of the 2008 election, and updates those results with current Rasmussen state polls as they are published.

Final 2008 Electoral College results were Obama 365, McCain 173. My model begins with Obama 364, McCain 174, due to not handling the few split-win states.

Furthermore, 2010 apportionment favored Republicans, leaving us with a starting point of Obama 358, Romney 180.

This Edition's Updates:

Since the last report, Rasmussen published polls in Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, Virginia, and a re-poll in Wisconsin. Obama's Electoral College count has gone down to 260 Electoral Votes to Romney's growth to 238, with 37 EV up for grabs. If the election were held today, the race would be leaning to Obama. Probabilistically, Romney has a 25.1% chance of winning today, an increase of about 13% from the prior report.

In Colorado, the race is still a tie. Romney's gained 2% from the mid-June poll, but so did Obama, leaving the race as a Toss-up.

In Florida, Romney made a slight gain, increasing his 1% lead to 2% from the June poll. Romney's support fell by 1% from June, but Obama's support fell by 2%, inching Florida into the Leans Romney category, moving Florida's 29 Electoral Votes into Romney's column.

In Indiana, the bottom fell out for the Obama campaign. Romney gained 3% from a late-May poll, while Obama lost 7%, making Indiana safe for Romney.

In Iowa, Romney lost 1% from a mid-June poll, while Obama lost 2%, netting a 2% lead for Romney. Iowa moves from Toss-up to Leans Romney and another 6 Electoral Vote pickup.

In Ohio, Romney held his support from a mid-July poll, while Obama lost 2%. Ohio moves from Leans Obama to Toss-up, and Obama loses 18 Electoral Votes.

In Virginia, Obama had some success. Romney held his position from a mid-July poll, while Obama gained 1%, netting a 2% lead for Obama. Virginia moves from Toss-up to Leans Obama and gives him 13 Electoral Votes, making back some of the 18 he lost in Ohio.

In Wisconsin, a big shift happened - again. Rasmussen re-polled his late-July poll because of the primary, and Romney regained his loss plus another 1%. Obama lost 2% from the July poll, but is still in a better place than his 44% from mid-June. While not totally re-flipping, Wisconsin moves to a Toss-up, taking another 10 Electoral Votes away from Obama.

Below is the latest round of state polls. The first number is the change in GOP result from the last poll (or last election if no prior poll), and the second number is the separation from the Democrat candidate's result.

As of now, the Senate still looks to be a 51-49 GOP take-over, with a probability of 84.3%.

Since the last report, Rasmussen published polls in Florida, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

In Florida, with the primary behind them, Republican Mack lost 6% from a mid-July poll, while incumbent Democrat Nelson gained 10%, making this race a 47%-40% hold for Democrats. Previously, the July poll had Republicans gaining this seat.

In Ohio, the state appears to be moving towards Republicans. Mandel gained 2% from the July poll, while incumbent Brown lost 2%, making this race a 44% toss-up.

In Virginia, Republican Allen picked up another 1% from the July poll, while Democrat Kaine remains unchanged over three polls. The race is now tied at 46%. Let's hope that the Senate race is a foreshadowing of the President's race.

In Wisconsin, the new poll proves that the last one was an outlier. Republican Thompson went from 52% to 41% and back to 54%, while Democrat Baldwin went from 36% to 48% and down to 43%. Wisconsin is now a safe gain for Republicans.

Below is the latest round of state polls. The first number is the change in GOP result from the last poll (or seat election if no prior poll), and the second number is the separation from the Democrat candidate's result.

Watch List:

Florida 2: -16% (R -7%) - moves back into the margin of error

Indiana 2: No Poll (R +2%)

Massachusetts 1: No Poll (R +0%)

Missouri2: No Poll (R +6%)

Montana 2: No Poll (R +2%)

New Mexico 1: No Poll (R -4%)

Ohio 1: +4 (R +0%)

Rhode Island 2: No Poll (R -7%)

Tennessee 2: No Poll (R +2.7%)

Virginia 2: +1% (R +0%)

Wisconsin 2: +18% (R +11%) - moves out of the margin of error

Using the most recent Rasmussen polls, the results of 32,000 simulated elections are listed in the table below. The definitions of the columns are:

"GOP Senate Seats P10  the value where the probability of the actual number being lower is 10%.

GOP Senate Seats EV  the expected value (mean) or probability-weighted average of the simulation.

GOP Senate Seats P90  the value where the probability of the actual number being lower is 90%. Or, it is the value where the probability of the actual number being higher is 10%.

Given the impact of the third party Nadar vote for the Bush election, I would like to see some analysis of the potential impact of the Libertarian Party, Green Party, and Goode and Rohmer third party vote probabilities.

I think the impact shows up in the totals. For example, in Ohio the vote is tied at 45%. Other candidates get 6%, and 4% are undecided. The candidates that you list would show up in that 6%.

Are you asking whether that 6% is coming from Romney's or Obama's total, or whether they would go to neither and the voter will just stay home, or whether they would still vote for the 3rd party candidate on election day?

Most people think that the undecided vote tends to break for the challenger, because if they supported the incumbent they'd already have made up their mind. Along those lines, one could surmise that the 3rd party vote is also a protest against the incumbent moreso than a refusal to support the challenger.

I use Rasmussen's public polling data, so I'm not diving (yet) into the details where 3rd party insights may lie. That said, I'm 100% certain that a 3rd party candidate will not win the Presidency.

I too am certain that a third party candidate will not win. The question is how much will one candidate or the other be hurt by them. The Libertarians and Goode supporters will probably draw from the Republican side. The Greens will tend to be from the Democrats. Not sure what the trend would be for Rohmer. There is a party, I think called Peace and Freedom in California which would probably draw from the Democrats. I’m not sure what else is out there. Given the growth of green parties in Europe, I wonder about the future of the Green Party in the US.

Hear is another interesting link examining polls from a number of different angles, with lots of charts and data. Probably a good one to bookmark for on going follow-up. PJT—You might want to post this one too. My computer skills are weak.

I'm starting to look at the toplines. I'll let you all know if I see any trends.

I want to be careful about what I post, because the toplines are by subscription and I don't want to violate any copywrite or ownership laws. So far, I've only been using the content on the free side of Rasmussen's site.

I'm going to try to create some composite measures that don't expose Rasmussen's pay-data, if possible.

Let's see what the post-Ryan polls look like. Also the convention bounce.

I heard that Romney was somewhat limited in responding to Obama's lies because Romney spent most of his primary funds and has to wait for the general election to begin before he can start spending again. Since Obama was unopposed, he still has his primary funds to spend attacking Romney.

Hopefully, Obama's lies were so over-the-top that Romney doesn't need to respond; the people will be naturally turned off by Obama's extreme antics.

My read is Romney's slip is temporary and likely due to the massive nobama ad campaign this last month, which even though sounds a bit early for so much ads, the nobama camp is in a life or death struggle to get their 2008 voters re-energized (which does not seems to be working very well).

GOP will get a bump following the Convention as more Indies start listening, nobama will start to run low on funds and the final 3 or 4 weeks may see nobama unable to put together many ads. By then it'll almost be a done deal anyway regardless of how various polls want to push.

One thing I have noted, dems and nobama in particular are so emotionally tied to their far left ideology they give away their fear with body language. The worse their internal polls show, the more desperate they will come across. Desperation never gins up support.

13
posted on 08/19/2012 1:56:23 PM PDT
by X-spurt
(It is truly time for ON YOUR FEET or on your knees)

Below is a list of competitive or potentially competitive Senate races. With input from several FR political experts, I have ranked the list from most to least likely GOP win. The rankings will change as the election season progresses.

Note the differentiation between the seats that represent GOP Holds and those that represent opportunities for Gains. Democrats currently control 53 seats in the Senate (including two independents who caucus with the Democrats), Republicans 47. If Republicans hold all the seats they have currently, they will need to gain four more seats to have a majority.

We will likely lose ME, so we'll need five gains for a majority. As of 8/19/12, the best opportunities for those gains are in the states of NE, MO, WI, ND, and MT.

Links to GOP primary winners' websites are included so you can learn more about the candidates and donate, if you feel so inclined.

Given the impact of the third party Nadar vote for the Bush election, I would like to see some analysis of the potential impact of the Libertarian Party, Green Party, and Goode and Rohmer third party vote probabilities.

I'll be shocked if the third parties combined will get anything more than 2% of the total national popular vote. That would be a generous estimate. And Nader's impact on the Bush election in 2000 was merely the result of a very unusually tight race in Florida: 500+ votes separating Bush and Gore out of more than 5 million total votes cast which happened to be decisive for Bush's margin in the electoral college. (It was not because of any unusual strength for Nader's Green Party candidacy.) The probability of a similar occurrence this year is very small.

That's why when you see a Ras poll indicating that 6% in a particular state (like Ohio this week) prefer a third party candidate, you can bet your farm that the majority of those third party people will either stay home or vote for one of the major candidates, with Romney getting more of their votes than Obama. Remember that some people who receive a robo-call from a pollster will prefer, because they are uncomfortable talking to an electronic voice about Obama, to wimp out and say they're undecided or are supporting another candidate.

Obama can't mathematically win re-election with only 45% of the popular vote. He won't be getting very much more from the segment of voters who are now telling a pollster that they are undecided or voting third party, certainly not enough to push him past Romney.

I don’t know how Nader got over 2% 12 years ago but Obama/McLame got over 98% of the vote against an Indy Nader and 2 former members of Congress on the Green and Libertarian tickets.

So I don’t see Goode and Johnson making much difference. Johnson it seems takes pretty evenly from both and probably won’t be a factor outside his own state.

The only thing is Goode could hurt in his critical home state with just 1 or 2 points. I hope not. Bob Barr did very poorly in his home state of Georgia in 2008, less than 1%.

No Nader this time. I don’t know who the Greens have but the Roseanne Barr/Cindy Sheenhan ticket is on the Peace and Freedom ballot in Cali! So is a member of this site on the American Independent ballot.

After yesterdays unbelievable gaffe by Todd Aikin, you can give MO to Claire McKaskill.

I heard what Todd Akin said. It was a gaffe, but hardly "unbelievable." Of course the desperate 'Rats are out there jumping down his throat because they know they're behind and have to use every opportunity.

But was it such a terrible gaffe, compared to some of Obama's (e.g., "57 states" or "you didn't build that") or Biden's (e.g., asking a disabled person to stand up in a crowd, claiming that FDR went on TV after the 1929 stock market crash, "'jobs' is a 3-letter word" and many, many more) or Elizabeth Warren's alleged American Indian ancestry?

Fact is that the pro-abortion crowd, which would be the part of the electorate offended by Akin's gaffe, would be already voting for McKaskill anyway. And I wouldn't think that abortion is such a hot button issue this year anyway.

Fact is that the pro-abortion crowd, which would be the part of the electorate offended by Akin's gaffe, would be already voting for McKaskill anyway.

Maybe so. But what about beyond MO. Remember how Mark Foley impacted the entire national scene. Akin could as well. Foley may have been re-elected had he run again and won-who knows. But he would be sitting there in Congress with a bull's eye on his head. Same will happen with Akin if he wins. We don't need that.

the desperate ‘Rats are out there jumping down his throat because they know they’re behind and have to use every opportunity.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Well, this ignoramus gave them an opportunity.....a very big opportunity. The people of MO should have listened to Sarah Palin and chosen Sarah Steele as the GOP candidate.

25
posted on 08/20/2012 6:19:51 AM PDT
by pistolpackinpapa
(Why is it that you never see any Obama bumper stickers on cars going to work in the mornings?)

Maybe so. But what about beyond MO. Remember how Mark Foley impacted the entire national scene. Akin could as well. Foley may have been re-elected had he run again and won-who knows. But he would be sitting there in Congress with a bull's eye on his head. Same will happen with Akin if he wins. We don't need that.

Closest thing in recent years I can compare this to is George Allen's "macaca" remark. But that was in VA where the WaPo has its clout, and I think it was closer to the election in timing. It hurt Allen in a close race, but that was a 'Rat year nationally. Missouri has no equivalent to the WaPo. And most importantly, abortion is not on the radar screen nationally this year.

No, the drive-bys will have a field day with Akin for a couple of days, but the GOP National Convention will knock it out of the headlines next week.

The Greens have Dr. Jill Stein, a Harvard graduate physician. She is a neat conservatively dressed gray haired woman. The Roseanne Barr competition was pretty much a joke, although it did bring some publicity to the race. RB will probably do better in California than she did nationally with the Greens, although she did well with black voters.

The Greens have Dr. Jill Stein, a Harvard graduate physician. She is a neat conservatively dressed gray haired woman. The Roseanne Barr competition was pretty much a joke, although it did bring some publicity to the race. RB will probably do better in California than she did nationally with the Greens, although she did well with black voters.

I don’t know if it’s true, but I encountered one report that said she did a better job than Romney when they debated in MA. I do hope they will let the small party candidates take part in at least some of the debates. One thing that separates the Green Party from the big parties, and I think also the others is that they take no corporate or big labor donations. How refreshing.

A third party candidate they will let in the POTUS debates if they hit like 15% in the polls. Not gonna happen for any of them, not by a mile. They will have their own debate that Romney and Obama will not attend. So Stein ain’t gonna be in the ring with Romney again. I recall hearing he did do bad in those 2002 debates, I thought he would lose but he still beat the rat O’Brien.

No corporate or labor money is nice, but to be fair I doubt any of the third parties have been offered any. I doubt the Greens would refuse labor money. The Libertarians and Constitution parties maybe would reject corporate if offered but they will not get offered any. No one wants to a buy a party that can’t win, there would be no point.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.